Effectiveness of mHealth-based psychosocial interventions for breast cancer patients and their caregivers: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 3.5 3区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare Pub Date : 2025-02-01 Epub Date: 2023-08-31 DOI:10.1177/1357633X231187432
Jia Yu Amelia Tan, Germaine Yi Qing Ong, Ling Jie Cheng, Minna Pikkarainen, Hong-Gu He
{"title":"Effectiveness of mHealth-based psychosocial interventions for breast cancer patients and their caregivers: A systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Jia Yu Amelia Tan, Germaine Yi Qing Ong, Ling Jie Cheng, Minna Pikkarainen, Hong-Gu He","doi":"10.1177/1357633X231187432","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Breast cancer causes significant distress in patient-caregiver dyads. While psychosocial and/or mHealth-based interventions have shown efficacy in improving their psychosocial well-being, no reviews have synthesised the effectiveness of such interventions delivered specifically to the breast cancer patient-caregiver dyad.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To synthesise available evidence examining the effectiveness of mHealth-based psychosocial interventions among breast cancer patient-caregiver dyads in improving their psychosocial well-being (primary outcomes: dyadic adjustment, depression and anxiety; secondary outcomes: stress, symptom distress, social well-being and relationship quality), compared to active or non-active controls.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A systematic review and meta-analysis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Randomised controlled trials and quasi-experimental studies were comprehensively searched from seven electronic databases (PubMed, CENTRAL, CINAHL, Embase, PsycINFO, Scopus, Web of Science), ongoing trial registries (ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO ICTRP) and grey literature (ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global) from inception of databases till 23 December 2022. Studies involving breast cancer patient-caregiver dyads participating in mHealth-based psychosocial interventions, compared to active or non-active controls, were included. Exclusion criteria were terminally ill patients and/or participants with psychiatric disorders or cognitive impairment and interventions collecting symptomatic data, promoting breast cancer screening or involving only physical activities. Screening, data extraction and quality appraisal of studies were conducted independently by two reviewers. Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool version 1 and JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist were used to appraise the randomised controlled trials and quasi-experimental studies, respectively. Meta-analyses using Review Manager 5.4.1 synthesised the effects of outcomes of interest. Sensitivity and subgroup analyses were conducted. The GRADE approach appraised the overall evidence quality.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twelve trials involving 1204 breast cancer patient-caregiver dyads were included. Meta-analyses found statistically significant increase in caregiver anxiety (standardised mean difference (SMD) = 0.43, 95% confidence interval (CI) [0.09, 0.77], <i>Z</i> = 2.47, <i>p </i>= 0.01), involving 479 caregivers in 5 studies, and stress (SMD = 0.25, 95% CI [0.05, 0.45], <i>Z</i> = 2.44, <i>p </i>= 0.01), involving 387 caregivers in 4 studies post-intervention, favouring control groups. The intervention effects on the remaining outcomes were statistically insignificant. Beneficial effects of such interventions remain uncertain. The overall quality of evidence was very low for all primary outcomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Results of the effectiveness of mHealth-based psychosocial interventions on the psychosocial well-being of breast cancer patient-caregiver dyads are inconclusive. The high heterogeneity shown in the meta-analyses and very-low overall quality of evidence imply the need for cautious interpretation of findings. Higher-quality studies are needed to assess the effects of psychosocial interventions on dyadic outcomes and determine optimal intervention regimes.</p>","PeriodicalId":50024,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare","volume":" ","pages":"184-197"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1357633X231187432","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/8/31 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Breast cancer causes significant distress in patient-caregiver dyads. While psychosocial and/or mHealth-based interventions have shown efficacy in improving their psychosocial well-being, no reviews have synthesised the effectiveness of such interventions delivered specifically to the breast cancer patient-caregiver dyad.

Objective: To synthesise available evidence examining the effectiveness of mHealth-based psychosocial interventions among breast cancer patient-caregiver dyads in improving their psychosocial well-being (primary outcomes: dyadic adjustment, depression and anxiety; secondary outcomes: stress, symptom distress, social well-being and relationship quality), compared to active or non-active controls.

Design: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Methods: Randomised controlled trials and quasi-experimental studies were comprehensively searched from seven electronic databases (PubMed, CENTRAL, CINAHL, Embase, PsycINFO, Scopus, Web of Science), ongoing trial registries (ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO ICTRP) and grey literature (ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global) from inception of databases till 23 December 2022. Studies involving breast cancer patient-caregiver dyads participating in mHealth-based psychosocial interventions, compared to active or non-active controls, were included. Exclusion criteria were terminally ill patients and/or participants with psychiatric disorders or cognitive impairment and interventions collecting symptomatic data, promoting breast cancer screening or involving only physical activities. Screening, data extraction and quality appraisal of studies were conducted independently by two reviewers. Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool version 1 and JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist were used to appraise the randomised controlled trials and quasi-experimental studies, respectively. Meta-analyses using Review Manager 5.4.1 synthesised the effects of outcomes of interest. Sensitivity and subgroup analyses were conducted. The GRADE approach appraised the overall evidence quality.

Results: Twelve trials involving 1204 breast cancer patient-caregiver dyads were included. Meta-analyses found statistically significant increase in caregiver anxiety (standardised mean difference (SMD) = 0.43, 95% confidence interval (CI) [0.09, 0.77], Z = 2.47, p = 0.01), involving 479 caregivers in 5 studies, and stress (SMD = 0.25, 95% CI [0.05, 0.45], Z = 2.44, p = 0.01), involving 387 caregivers in 4 studies post-intervention, favouring control groups. The intervention effects on the remaining outcomes were statistically insignificant. Beneficial effects of such interventions remain uncertain. The overall quality of evidence was very low for all primary outcomes.

Conclusions: Results of the effectiveness of mHealth-based psychosocial interventions on the psychosocial well-being of breast cancer patient-caregiver dyads are inconclusive. The high heterogeneity shown in the meta-analyses and very-low overall quality of evidence imply the need for cautious interpretation of findings. Higher-quality studies are needed to assess the effects of psychosocial interventions on dyadic outcomes and determine optimal intervention regimes.

基于移动健康的心理社会干预对乳腺癌患者及其护理人员的有效性:系统回顾和荟萃分析
背景:乳腺癌对患者和护理者的影响很大。虽然基于心理社会和/或移动健康的干预措施已显示出改善其心理社会福祉的有效性,但没有综述综合了专门针对乳腺癌患者-护理者两组的此类干预措施的有效性。目的:综合现有证据,检验基于移动健康的心理社会干预在乳腺癌患者-护理者双组中改善其心理社会健康的有效性(主要结局:双组调整、抑郁和焦虑;次要结果:与主动或非主动对照相比,压力、症状困扰、社会福祉和关系质量。设计:系统回顾和荟萃分析。方法:从7个电子数据库(PubMed, CENTRAL, CINAHL, Embase, PsycINFO, Scopus, Web of Science),正在进行的试验注册(ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO ICTRP)和灰色文献(ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global)中全面检索随机对照试验和准实验研究,从数据库建立到2022年12月23日。研究纳入了参与基于移动健康的心理社会干预的乳腺癌患者-护理者二人组的研究,并与主动或非主动对照进行了比较。排除标准为绝症患者和/或有精神障碍或认知障碍的参与者,干预措施包括收集症状数据、促进乳腺癌筛查或仅涉及体育活动。研究的筛选、数据提取和质量评价由两名审稿人独立进行。采用Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool version 1和JBI Critical evaluation Checklist分别对随机对照试验和准实验研究进行评价。使用Review Manager 5.4.1进行meta分析,综合了感兴趣的结果的影响。进行敏感性和亚组分析。GRADE方法评价整体证据质量。结果:纳入了12项试验,涉及1204对乳腺癌患者-护理者。meta分析发现,干预后照顾者焦虑(标准化平均差值(SMD) = 0.43, 95%可信区间(CI) [0.09, 0.77], Z = 2.47, p = 0.01)和压力(SMD = 0.25, 95% CI [0.05, 0.45], Z = 2.44, p = 0.01)增加有统计学意义,4项研究中有387名照顾者,干预后对照组更有利。干预对其余结果的影响在统计学上不显著。这些干预措施的有益效果仍不确定。所有主要结局的总体证据质量都很低。结论:基于移动健康的心理社会干预对乳腺癌患者-护理者二人组心理社会健康的有效性尚无定论。荟萃分析中显示的高异质性和非常低的总体证据质量意味着需要谨慎解释研究结果。需要更高质量的研究来评估心理社会干预对双重结果的影响,并确定最佳的干预方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
14.10
自引率
10.60%
发文量
174
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare provides excellent peer reviewed coverage of developments in telemedicine and e-health and is now widely recognised as the leading journal in its field. Contributions from around the world provide a unique perspective on how different countries and health systems are using new technology in health care. Sections within the journal include technology updates, editorials, original articles, research tutorials, educational material, review articles and reports from various telemedicine organisations. A subscription to this journal will help you to stay up-to-date in this fast moving and growing area of medicine.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信